Message-ID: <639b020c-7419-cbda-64c4-caffd8683131@ghiti.fr>
Date:   Fri, 10 Feb 2023 18:10:23 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.4.2
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from uapi
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20221211061358.28035-1-palmer@rivosinc.com>
From:   Alexandre Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>
In-Reply-To: <20221211061358.28035-1-palmer@rivosinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 12/11/22 07:13, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> This all came up in the context of increasing COMMAND_LINE_SIZE in the
> RISC-V port.  In theory that's a UABI break, as COMMAND_LINE_SIZE is the
> maximum length of /proc/cmdline and userspace could staticly rely on
> that to be correct.
>
> Usually I wouldn't mess around with changing this sort of thing, but
> PowerPC increased it with a5980d064fe2 ("powerpc: Bump COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
> to 2048").  There are also a handful of examples of COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
> increasing, but they're from before the UAPI split so I'm not quite sure
> what that means: e5a6a1c90948 ("powerpc: derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
> asm-generic"), 684d2fd48e71 ("[S390] kernel: Append scpdata to kernel
> boot command line"), 22242681cff5 ("MIPS: Extend COMMAND_LINE_SIZE"),
> and 2b74b85693c7 ("sh: Derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
> asm-generic/setup.h.").
>
> It seems to me like COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really just shouldn't have been
> part of the uapi to begin with, and userspace should be able to handle
> /proc/cmdline of whatever length it turns out to be.  I don't see any
> references to COMMAND_LINE_SIZE anywhere but Linux via a quick Google
> search, but that's not really enough to consider it unused on my end.
>
> The feedback on the v1 seemed to indicate that COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really
> shouldn't be part of uapi, so this now touches all the ports.  I've
> tried to split this all out and leave it bisectable, but I haven't
> tested it all that aggressively.
>
> Changes since v1 <https://lore.kernel.org/all/20210423025545.313965-1-palmer@dabbelt.com/>:
> * Touches every arch.
>
>

The command line size is still an issue on riscv, any comment on this so 
we can make progress?

Thanks,

Alex